transactions_for_address

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses pagination behavior and inclusion of decoded log events, but lacks details like error handling, response format, or authentication requirements. Adequate but not thorough.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. The second sentence listing parameters is somewhat redundant with the schema, but overall it is structured efficiently.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema and 6 parameters, the description covers the basic functionality but misses details like default values (e.g., noLogs defaults to true), page size limits, and error cases. Sufficient for a simple use case but not fully complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

All parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), so the description's parameter summary adds little new information beyond listing with parentheticals. It confirms the required/optional split but does not enhance understanding of parameter semantics.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool fetches transactions for an address with decoded log events in a paginated manner, using a specific verb+resource combination. While it doesn't explicitly distinguish from siblings like 'transactions_for_block' or 'log_events_by_address', the mention of 'decoded log events' provides some differentiation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description only says 'commonly used' without specifying when to use this tool versus alternatives. No guidance on when not to use it or which sibling tools might be better suited for different contexts is provided.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.